March 2018

Aug 03, 2010

Libraries have always filtered
print content -- they don't stock Hustler in the magazine section, for
example. The internet makes this job much more difficult. Filtering
technology is improving; if the software has evolved to a certain point,
then our library should carefully consider using it.

From one of my previous posts on filters for library computers, a topic back in the news. More here and here.

What we don't need is the kind of panic reflected in some of the comments beneath those earlier posts.

The N&R reports that Danny Thompson "waved a thick stack of incident reports from this year for the central library," and said, "I don’t want to mention some of the acts that are going on."

One really ought to watch the discussion of this topic on Ch. 13...I'm not sure which was more uncomfortable - trying to watch Danny make a motion that would stick or watching the other 8 council members say how they thought it was a great idea...just not the way Danny wanted to do it. It seemed bad form by Danny to have not even mention that he was going to bring the topic up to the City Manager.

what got me was how trudy wade made a motion amost identicle to Robbie Perkins motion in regards to the filters and just minutes earlier voted against the motion when Robbie made it. Its all a political game and everyone has an agenda.

"The library computers already are equipped with a device that makes pornographic websites load more slowly, to try to deter users."

From reading the previous threads, I'm surprised I haven't heard some of you express outrage over this censorship-lite. Where was the research and expert opinion? They must have snuck that one past the bloggers somehow.

They still stock books in libraries, don't they? I guess folks could get both their porn and their human sexuality education off the stacks if the filters are inconveniencing them. I mean they're not banning pornographic books and magazines from libraries as well, are they?

well the whole thing is politcal anyway. Internet filters have been around for a very long time and im sure ever since internet access was provided at the libraries, people have been looking at pornography. I think for starters they need to make sure ALL computer stations are in the open. Maybe install monitoring cameras near the stations. There should also be stiffer penalties for looking at pornography on the internet in public facilities. Banning a patron for a day is a slap on the wrist. Hefty fines would help and maybe even jail time for habitual offenders. At least if we fine offenders, the city would be making money insead of losing money on installing expensive blocking software at Greensboro's 7 libraries.

cp - you sort of made my point. there was no presentation, opinions, or professionals there to help guide the discussion. Zack Matheny said Sandy Neerman was against it, and Danny was essentially saying she wasn't "for" it, but there was nothing presented on the effectiveness of different software, or even different approaches that other communities have taken to address the same issue. it was a waste of council time during the meeting...it's not that it isn't a valid issue, but it appeared that Danny wanted it all to himself rather than work with staff and council.

EXACTLY Glenwoodobserver. Its would odd that he didn't talk to the city manager, staff or council ahead of time. He wants it to be all his baby so when election time comes around he can say he put internet filters in the library to protect our children. He's playing the conservative values card. You see Danny and Mayor Bill Knight came in and said they were going to make big changes so that Greensboro would have a physically conservative operated government. They have failed at that so Danny is just trying to get some accomplishments under his belt fearing he could be ousted next election. He hasn't done anything and he is inexperienced. He doesn't understand the protocol in how city government works. On the liberal side, at times Jim Kee seems to be wet behind the ears as well. It just seems like he is a rubber stamp on some issues. but thats also the case with Trudy Wade and Mary Rakestraw. Those two vote in lockstep with one another and they seem to vote no on every progressive decision.